On 29 May 2006 at 13:16, Michael Bayer wrote: > Pursuant to this discussion, I propose we change the close() method, > illustrated below: > > result = sometable.select().execute() > result.close() > > to this: > > result = sometable.select().execute() > result.close_connection() > > to eliminate confusion this may cause. > > comments ? >
why do this? the object returned from file() does not have a method called close_file() the object returned from socket.socket() does not have a method called close_socket() isn't result from execute() a result set, that looks like any other result set? I can't see any benefit from renaming the close "operation" on execute() result sets. -- Brad Clements, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (315)268-1000 http://www.murkworks.com AOL-IM or SKYPE: BKClements ------------------------------------------------------- All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk! Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Sqlalchemy-users mailing list Sqlalchemy-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlalchemy-users
